Article View: comp.robotics
Article #1857Re: Sonar and the 68HC11
From: John Nagle
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:32
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:32
18 lines
1355 bytes
1355 bytes
epperson@adobe.com (Mark Epperson) writes:
>What about a differential sonar, has anyone done it? I envision
>a set of three receivers with the center one as the only transmitter.
>Any ideas?
>As I am not current in my physics, what would be the difficulties in
>making a phased array? (wavelength too long?)
It's really time for somebody to start developing smarter sonar
systems for robots. We've been using those dumb Polaroid sensors for a
decade now, and enough is known about bat, dophin, and submarine sonar
to do a much better job. The DSP chips are available and cheap.
Somebody with audio, DSP, or sonar experience needs to do this one.
A reasonable way to start would be to use a machine with stereo
audio inputs and outputs, and try to do bat-type FM sonar, operating
around 10-20KHz.
John Nagle
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan24.183226.10455@netcom.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!seismo!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!nagleReferences:
<EfM5_Ya00WBM458UUW@andrew.cmu.edu> <1993Jan24.081155.15471@adobe.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!seismo!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!The-Star.honeywell.com!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!nagle From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Newsgroups: comp.robotics Subject: Re: Sonar and the 68HC11 Message-ID: <1993Jan24.183226.10455@netcom.com> Date: 24 Jan 93 18:32:26 GMT References: <EfM5_Ya00WBM458UUW@andrew.cmu.edu> <1993Jan24.081155.15471@adobe.com> Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Lines: 18